<sandro> Chris: but this gets dangerously close to using sorts to define data modeling, which RIF-WG doesn't want to do.

chris: how are sorts and signatures related?
... translators can reasonably be expected to understand primitive sorts and builtin signatures
... limit overlap of sorts/sigs and datamodelling to builtin signatures/primitive sorts

<sandro> Chris: there will be some overlap between our sort mechanism for handling primitive datatypes, and the App Data Model facility. We'll try to minimize that.

<sandro> Sandro: there's no question sorts are not necessary. there's no question that sorts are useful. the question is how to combine/relate them to the ADM, and we can't settle that until we have ADM.

Fraoncois: XML structured datatypes can be used like FOL function terms

josb: aproposal to use XML Schema for ADM

Application Data Models

Harold: in reference to frame proposals, comment on need to represent subclass relations, would need to bridge those to RDFS?
... sorts are needed to avoid combinatorial explosions, rules on the web will range over large domains which will cost

<sandro> scribe:PaulVincent

Dave covers Data_Sets wiki page content...

Dave: Rules need to reference a concrete data set (fact set published at some location and some local data)
... Need a reference in the RIF to the data set -- this is a metadata problem
... ruleset requires dataset is the metadata relationship: dataset named by URI does not mandate a web dataset
... see example on Wiki page for supply chain ruleset with 2 datasets referenced
... binding of rulesets to datasets is separate from representation of datasets

Benjamin: the issue of how different peoples mappings agree can be partly met but the use of the metadata, a little metadata can go along way and build up by practice

<sandro> BenjaminGrosof: (1) does their mapping agree with my mapping? we thought about that a lot in SweetRules. A little metadata. A URI for the translation method.

<sandro> BenjaminGrosof: (2) we as a committee -- can't do these mappings. they are much too much work.

<sandro> I am confused about RIF having it's own canonical data model.

<sandro> DaveReynolds: How do you reconcile the idea of RIF having its own data model to "RIF will not invent yet another schema language"

csma: Not a new dat model in RIF but how the external data model *links* to the rules

Harold: there is a problem using XMLS (unencoded, so that application validators can be directly used) how to do access the XML structure, treat only as ground terms?

csma: Isn't there a middle ground like slotted syntax?

Jos: re: data model in RIF and map that to external models; advocate bottom up approach based on what we want to represent and see how we can map

Sandro: charter puts some of these issues into phase 2 (data models which don't go through the translator) [scribe didn't capture this accurately]

[Discussion on how current rule systems handle this]

Gary: we map object models into a form of slotted notation - need slots and lists

Hassan: in prolog separate edb and idb, raw data (edb) in XML/RDFS/whatever is not a problem
... when come to rules, the issue of variables arises. The problems is not for the dataset but for the rules.

<Harold> Visual Prolog (http://www.visual-prolog.com) has user-definable algebraic data types, which are relevant to supporting different appliction data models in RIF.

Paul: problem with rules being built on top of data models. If I represent some facts in the rules then that has to tied to the data model for data sets.

csma: if all are optional then still have bilateral agreements between parties wanting to exchange

<sandro> BenjaminGrosof: just translate the relevant section of OWL to RIF and send it along with your RIF.

<Harold> In many other Prologs (other than Visual Prolog) there is no application-fixed restriction on constructors/signatures. XMLS kind of reinvented Turbo/Visual Prolog's grammar-like mechanism to restrict the legal structured terms for different applications.

JosB and MichaelK and Francois: yes, what's disallowed is the same such pair being non-functional in its interpretation mapping

<Harold> "1"^^int vs. "1"^^string.

Sandro: Fido being both a cat and a dog is incompatible with RDF

Hassan and others: overloading is routine in many programming etc. languages, I sent an example about this earlier

Chris: now I don't know how to proceed -- ?

MarkusK: could make the "^^cat" be part of the constant name in

"Fido^^cat"

Benj: it's like "Fido the cat" vs. "Fido the dog"

Sandro: in the Semantic Web, we want URI's to denote the same thing

DaveReynolds: we could repeal our earlier resolution, and have the Core be first-order in style with predicates and functions/individuals be disjoint, and punt the single-sort case/semantics to an extension not the Core (of RIF)

Chris: so we have two options about how to proceed

1st is to backoff from sorts -> disjoint sorts

MichaelK: if we do, then we lose the ability to deal with RDF's generality via the one sort

<MarkusK> s /one sort/overlapping sorts/

Chris: 2nd is how we have been proceeding before this

DaveReynolds: we may have to back off to be able to achieve a Core

Sandro: if the constants are URI's then I object to the approach of "ConstnameURI^^sort"

MichaelK: sorts are not in the domain of discourse, unlike unary predicates; they are not sets of things in the domain of discourse but rather are outside of it and indicate such, plus have some other special characteristics like variables and things

MichaelK and Benj: URI's are often used just as essentially local names or strings [not further dereferenced or existing] so we want to be able to declare their sorts

Sandro: I second Dave's suggestion to back off sorts

Francois: I suggest not to consider sorts any longer, and for individual constants/symbols then say they are expected to behave like in [?] XML-S

MichaelK: for anything that is proposed, I want to see written down how it behaves

Christian: add typed literals and typed variables to a proposal

<sandro> PROPOSAL-DER: switch back from OS to DS, have only one sort, have typed literals as per RDF semantics.

<sandro> PROPOSAL-FB: DER + typed variables.

DaveReynolds: don't try to permit same symbol to be interpreted (as in general RDF) both as a predicate or (non-ind) function and as an individual

[NEW]ACTION: Benjamin to review Paula's phase 2 requirements and discuss [NEW]ACTION: Benjamin to work with Gary and DaveR on Test Cases approach [NEW]ACTION: Christian to get Philippe's comments on the list of built-ins send in English [NEW]ACTION: christian to put Arch on next telecon [NEW]ACTION: Christian to write up his suggestions for abstract syntax [NEW]ACTION: csma to put Arch on next telecon [NEW]ACTION: Gary to draft a list of the top few difficulties in mapping XMLS to what we have now [NEW]ACTION: Gary to review Paula's phase 2 requirements and discuss [NEW]ACTION: Gary work on unified strawman proposal for asn->xml system [NEW]ACTION: GaryHallmark to draft a list of the top few difficulties in mapping XMLS to what we have now [NEW]ACTION: Harold to collaborate with Dave on changes to absyn resulting from PROPOSAL-DER [NEW]ACTION: Harold to Help Michael Kifer remove overlapping sorts, don't mention sorts, handle datatypes as in RDF. [NEW]ACTION: Hassan to work on unified strawman proposal for asn->xml system [NEW]ACTION: Igor to look to into extending/removing builtins. [NEW]ACTION: Jdebruij to Help Michael Kifer remove overlapping sorts, don't mention sorts, handle datatypes as in RDF. [NEW]ACTION: Jeff to try to propose a strawman for a collection/list/sequences structure/mechanism (Harold to help). [NEW]ACTION: Jos to Help Michael Kifer remove overlapping sorts, don't mention sorts, handle datatypes as in RDF. [NEW]ACTION: Michael to Remove overlapping sorts, don't mention sorts, handle datatypes as in RDF. [NEW]ACTION: MichaelK, Jos, Harold: Remove overlapping sorts, don't mention sorts, handle datatypes as in RDF. [NEW]ACTION: Mkifer to Remove overlapping sorts, don't mention sorts, handle datatypes as in RDF. [NEW]ACTION: Paul to start discussion on implementation guidance for translating from Core to PR systems..... [NEW]ACTION: Sandro to write up his suggestions for abstract syntax [NEW]ACTION: Sandro work on unified strawman proposal for asn->xml system